Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 08 — · Chapter 130 — Redevelopment and Urban Renewal. State and Federal Aid. Community Development. Urban Homesteading. Abandoned and Blighted Property
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-124 (2026)

Declaration of public policy

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It is found and declared that there have existed and will continue to exist in the future in municipalities of the state substandard, insanitary, deteriorated, deteriorating, slum or blighted areas which constitute a serious and growing menace, injurious and inimical to the public health, safety, morals and welfare of the residents of the state; that the existence of such areas contributes substantially and increasingly to the spread of disease and crime, necessitating excessive and disproportionate expenditures of public funds for the preservation of the public health and safety, for crime prevention, correction, prosecution, punishment and the treatment of juvenile delinquency and for the maintenance of adequate police, fire and accident protection and other public services and facilities, and the existence of such areas constitutes an economic and social liability, substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of municipalities, and retards the provision of housing accommodation; that this menace is beyond remedy and control solely by regulatory process in the exercise of the police power and cannot be dealt with effectively by the ordinary operations of private enterprise without the aids herein provided; that the acquisition of property for the purpose of eliminating substandard, insanitary, deteriorated, deteriorating, slum or blighted conditions thereon or preventing recurrence of such conditions in the area, the removal of structures and improvement of sites, the disposition of the property for redevelopment incidental to the foregoing, the exercise of powers by municipalities acting through agencies known as redevelopment agencies as herein provided, and any assistance which may be given by any public body in connection therewith, are public uses and purposes for which public money may be expended and the power of eminent domain exercised; and that the necessity in the public interest for the provisions of this chapter is hereby declared as a matter of legislative determination.

(1949 Rev., S. 988; 1953, S. 483d; November, 1955, S. N30; 1959, P.A. 397, S. 1.)

History: 1959 act added word “deteriorating”.

Inclusion within area of certain properties which are not substandard does not constitute unreasonable or arbitrary action because it is condition obtaining as to entire area and not as to individual properties which is determinative; addition of word “deteriorating” indicates legislative intent that section is to be liberally construed. 147 C. 321. In determination whether property which is not substandard is essential to plan of redevelopment, condition obtaining as to entire area and not as to individual properties is determinative; condition of plaintiffs' buildings and use to which they are devoted have significance on question whether they could not be successfully integrated into overall plan for area in order to achieve its objective; if they could not be, then acquisition of property was essential to complete an adequate unit of development, even though the property was not, in itself, substandard. 150 C. 42. Cited. 162 C. 531.

Authority and obligations under Redevelopment Act discussed. 51 CA 262.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1960–2006 · leading case: Kelo v. City of New London, 843 A.2d 500 (Conn. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kelo v. City of New London, 843 A.2d 500 (Conn. 2004). · cites it 9× “” General Statutes § 8-124. Private economic development pursuant to chapter 132 of the General Statutes can be distinguished in at least two important respects from previous notions of public use.”
City of West Haven v. Norback, 819 A.2d 235 (Conn. 2003). · cites it 4× “Pursuant to that redevelopment plan and as authorized by General Statutes § 8-124, 2 the plaintiff took approximately eighty-four acres of land through its power of eminent domain.”
Mar. Ventures, LLC v. City of Norwalk, 894 A.2d 946 (Conn. 2006). · cites it 6× “By virtue of the Connecticut redevelopment act (act); General Statutes § 8-124 et seq.; the legislature has delegated to municipalities, acting through redevelopment agencies, the authority to exercise the power of eminent domain by taking land that a redevelopment agency has…”
Citino v. Redevelopment Agency, 721 A.2d 1197 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 2× “The defendant agency, which was responsible for the redevelopment project, was created pursuant to the Redevelopment Act (act), General Statutes § 8-124 et seq. 3 Pursuant to the act, redevelopment agencies are authorized to prepare redevelopment plans, 4 to acquire property by…”
Urban Redev. Com'n of Stamford v. Katsetos, 860 A.2d 1233 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to General Statutes § 8-124 et seq., the city of Stamford authorized the plaintiff to adopt an urban renewal plan and to acquire properties to further the goals of that plan.”
Aposporos v. Urban Redevelopment Comm'n, 790 A.2d 1167 (Conn. 2002). · cites it 2× “In March, 1963, the city’s board of representatives (board) approved an urban renewal plan entitled “Urban Renewal Plan for the Southeast Quadrant (Extended) Urban Renewal Project” (1963 plan) pursuant to General Statutes § 8-124 et seq., the Connecticut redevelopment act (act).”
Karp v. Urban Redevelopment Comm'n, 294 A.2d 633 (Conn. 1972). · cites it 2× “Compensation for any taking of private property was provided for and in addition, General Statutes § 8-132, with which we are concerned, allowed for an appeal to the Superior Court in the event an owner of property was dissatisfied with the statement of compensation.”
Stocker v. City of Waterbury, 226 A.2d 514 (Conn. 1967). · cites it 2× “In the Bahr case, the condemning agency was proceeding to take the property for redevelopment purposes under what are now §§ 8-124—8-139 of the General Statutes. Under § 8-129, title to the property and the right to immediate possession vested in the agency immediately upon the…”
Pet Car Prods., Inc. v. Barnett, 184 A.2d 797 (Conn. 1962). · cites it 2× “1955, § 483d (as amended, General Statutes § 8-124). To prevent the area from reverting to its former status, adherence to the redevelopment plan is required.”
Graham v. Houlihan, 160 A.2d 745 (Conn. 1960). · cites it 2× “, § N30 (as amended, General Statutes §8-124). It states, in part, that “there have existed and will continue to exist in the future in municipalities .”
Perrys, Inc. v. Waterbury Redevelopment Agency, 249 A.2d 256 (Conn. 1968). “In its motion to erase the ease from the docket, the defendant agency alleges that it acquired the property by eminent domain pursuant to §§ 8-124 through 8-133 of the General Statutes, that those statutes provide the exclusive remedy for the determination and recovery of any…”
Mar. Ventures, LLC v. City of Norwalk, 855 A.2d 1011 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 4× “The declared public policy of redevelopment is the elimination of “substandard, insanitary, deteriorated, deteriorating, slum or blighted conditions .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.